linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	will.deacon@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com
Cc: alex.popov@linux.com, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org>,
	kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, james.morse@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: Clear the stack
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 15:58:19 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <06dd55e6-d39e-7617-b644-bdd04fa3c030@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180703121440.v4olvwqb3ykgt5fm@lakrids.cambridge.arm.com>

On 07/03/2018 05:14 AM, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> It might be cleaner just to use on_accessible_stack and then another
>> function to get the top of stack. This also might just be
>> reimplementing what x86 already has? (Mark, Ard?)
> It looks like we could build a get_stack_info() as they have.
> 
> We could probably clean up our stack traced atop of that, too.

So I spent some time looking at this and I'm not 100% clear
if there would actually be much benefit to re-writing with
get_stack_info. Most of that design seems to come from x86
needing to handle multiple unwind options which arm64 doesn't
need to worry about. Any rework ended up with roughly
the same code without any notable benefit that I could see.
It's possible I'm missing what kind of cleanup you're suggesting
but I think just going with a tweaked version of on_accessible_stack
would be fine.

Thanks,
Laura

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-07-17 22:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-06-29 19:05 [PATCH] arm64: Clear the stack Laura Abbott
2018-06-29 19:47 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-29 20:19 ` Kees Cook
2018-06-29 20:22   ` Laura Abbott
2018-06-29 20:25     ` Kees Cook
2018-07-02  9:59       ` Will Deacon
2018-07-02 17:29         ` Kees Cook
2018-07-04 14:04           ` Will Deacon
2018-07-02 13:02 ` Alexander Popov
2018-07-02 18:48   ` Laura Abbott
2018-07-03 12:14     ` Mark Rutland
2018-07-03 15:03       ` Catalin Marinas
2018-07-03 20:38         ` Alexander Popov
2018-07-17 22:58       ` Laura Abbott [this message]
2018-07-19 10:41         ` Mark Rutland
2018-07-12  0:05 ` Kees Cook
2018-07-12 12:10   ` Will Deacon

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=06dd55e6-d39e-7617-b644-bdd04fa3c030@redhat.com \
    --to=labbott@redhat.com \
    --cc=alex.popov@linux.com \
    --cc=ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=keescook@chromium.org \
    --cc=kernel-hardening@lists.openwall.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).